Background The efficacy of interleukin-6 receptor blockade in hospitalized patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (Covid-19) who are not receiving mechanical ventilation is unclear. Methods We performed a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial involving patients with confirmed severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection, hyperinflammatory states, and at least two of the following signs: fever (body temperature >38°C), pulmonary infiltrates, or the need for supplemental oxygen in order to maintain an oxygen saturation greater than 92%. Patients were randomly assigned in a 2:1 ratio to receive standard care plus a single dose of either tocilizumab (8 mg per kilogram of body weight) or placebo. The primary outcome was intubation or death, assessed in a time-to-event analysis. The secondary efficacy outcomes were clinical worsening and discontinuation of supplemental oxygen among patients who had been receiving it at baseline, both assessed in time-to-event analyses. Results We enrolled 243 patients; 141 (58%) were men, and 102 (42%) were women. The median age was 59.8 years (range, 21.7 to 85.4), and 45% of the patients were Hispanic or Latino. The hazard ratio for intubation or death in the tocilizumab group as compared with the placebo group was 0.83 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.38 to 1.81; P=0.64), and the hazard ratio for disease worsening was 1.11 (95% CI, 0.59 to 2.10; P=0.73). At 14 days, 18.0% of the patients in the tocilizumab group and 14.9% of the patients in the placebo group had had worsening of disease. The median time to discontinuation of supplemental oxygen was 5.0 days (95% CI, 3.8 to 7.6) in the tocilizumab group and 4.9 days (95% CI, 3.8 to 7.8) in the placebo group (P=0.69). At 14 days, 24.6% of the patients in the tocilizumab group and 21.2% of the patients in the placebo group were still receiving supplemental oxygen. Patients who received tocilizumab had fewer serious infections than patients who received placebo. Conclusions Tocilizumab was not effective for preventing intubation or death in moderately ill hospitalized patients with Covid-19. Some benefit or harm cannot be ruled out, however, because the confidence intervals for efficacy comparisons were wide. (Funded by Genentech; ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT04356937 .)

The WHO Rapid Evidence Appraisal for COVID-19 Therapies (REACT) Working Group IMPORTANCE Clinical trials assessing the efficacy of IL-6 antagonists in patients hospitalized for COVID-19 have variously reported benefit, no effect, and harm.OBJECTIVE To estimate the association between administration of IL-6 antagonists compared with usual care or placebo and 28-day all-cause mortality and other outcomes.DATA SOURCES Trials were identified through systematic searches of electronic databases between October 2020 and January 2021. Searches were not restricted by trial status or language. Additional trials were identified through contact with experts.STUDY SELECTION Eligible trials randomly assigned patients hospitalized for COVID-19 to a group in whom IL-6 antagonists were administered and to a group in whom neither IL-6 antagonists nor any other immunomodulators except corticosteroids were administered. Among 72 potentially eligible trials, 27 (37.5%) met study selection criteria. DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESISIn this prospective meta-analysis, risk of bias was assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias Assessment Tool. Inconsistency among trial results was assessed using the I 2 statistic. The primary analysis was an inverse variance-weighted fixed-effects meta-analysis of odds ratios (ORs) for 28-day all-cause mortality. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURESThe primary outcome measure was all-cause mortality at 28 days after randomization. There were 9 secondary outcomes including progression to invasive mechanical ventilation or death and risk of secondary infection by 28 days.RESULTS A total of 10 930 patients (median age, 61 years [range of medians, 52-68 years]; 3560 [33%] were women) participating in 27 trials were included. By 28 days, there were 1407 deaths among 6449 patients randomized to IL-6 antagonists and 1158 deaths among 4481 patients randomized to usual care or placebo (summary OR, 0.86 [95% CI, 0.79-0.95]; P = .003 based on a fixed-effects meta-analysis). This corresponds to an absolute mortality risk of 22% for IL-6 antagonists compared with an assumed mortality risk of 25% for usual care or placebo. The corresponding summary ORs were 0.83 (95% CI, 0.74-0.92; P < .001) for tocilizumab and 1.08 (95% CI, 0.86-1.36; P = .52) for sarilumab. The summary ORs for the association with mortality compared with usual care or placebo in those receiving corticosteroids were 0.77 (95% CI, 0.68-0.87) for tocilizumab and 0.92 (95% CI, 0.61-1.38) for sarilumab. The ORs for the association with progression to invasive mechanical ventilation or death, compared with usual care or placebo, were 0.77 (95% CI, 0.70-0.85) for all IL-6 antagonists, 0.74 (95% CI, 0.66-0.82) for tocilizumab, and 1.00 (95% CI, 0.74-1.34) for sarilumab. Secondary infections by 28 days occurred in 21.9% of patients treated with IL-6 antagonists vs 17.6% of patients treated with usual care or placebo (OR accounting for trial sample sizes, 0.99; 95% CI, 0.85-1.16). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCEIn this prospective meta-analysis of clinical trials of patients hosp...

In a clinically representative cohort, multigene panel testing for HBOC risk assessment yielded findings likely to change clinical management for substantially more patients than does BRCA1/2 testing alone. Multigene testing in this setting is likely to alter near-term cancer risk assessment and management recommendations for mutation-affected individuals across a broad spectrum of cancer predisposition genes.

Purpose/Objective Lymphedema following breast cancer treatment can be an irreversible condition with a negative impact on quality of life. The goal of this study was to identify radiotherapy-related risk factors for lymphedema. Methods and Materials From 2005–2012, we prospectively performed arm volume measurements on 1,476 breast cancer patients at our institution using a Perometer. Treating each breast individually, 1099/1501 (73%) received radiotherapy. Arm measurements were performed pre- and post-operatively. Lymphedema was defined as ≥10% arm volume increase occurring >3 months post-operative. Univariate and multivariate Cox proportional hazard models were used to evaluate risk factors for lymphedema. Results At a median follow-up of 25.4 months (range 3.4–82.6), the 2-year cumulative incidence of lymphedema was 6.8%. Cumulative incidence by radiotherapy type was: 3.0% (no radiotherapy), 3.1% (breast or chest wall alone), 21.9% (supraclavicular (SC)), and 21.1% (SC and posterior axillary boost (PAB)). On multivariate analysis, the hazard ratio for RLNR (SC±PAB) was 1.7 (p = 0.025) compared to breast/chest wall radiation alone. There was no difference in lymphedema risk between SC and SC+PAB (p=0.96). Other independent risk factors included early post-operative swelling (p <0.0001), higher BMI (p<0.0001), greater number of lymph nodes dissected (p =0.018), and axillary lymph node dissection (p=0.0001). Conclusions In a large cohort of breast cancer patients prospectively screened for lymphedema, RLNR significantly increased risk of lymphedema compared to breast/chest wall radiation alone. When considering use of RLNR, clinicians should weigh the potential benefit of RLNR for control of disease with the increased risk of lymphedema.

Microfluidic devices have recently emerged as effective tools for cell separation compared to traditional techniques. These devices offer the advantages of small sample volumes, low cost, and high purity. Adhesion-based separation of cells from heterogeneous suspensions can be achieved by taking advantage of specific ligand-receptor interactions. The peptide sequences Arg-Glu-Asp-Val (REDV) and Val-Ala-Pro-Gly (VAPG) are known to bind preferentially to endothelial cells (ECs) and smooth muscle cells (SMCs), respectively. This article examines the roles of REDV and VAPG and fluid shear stress in achieving selective capture of ECs and SMCs in microfluidic devices. The adhesion of ECs in REDV-coated devices and SMCs in VAPG-coated devices increases significantly compared to that of the nontargeted cells with decreasing shear stress. Furthermore, the adhesion of these cells is shown to be independent of whether these cells flow through the devices as suspensions of only one cell type or as a heterogeneous suspension containing ECs, SMCs, and fibroblasts. Whereas the overall adhesion of cells in the devices is determined mainly by shear stress, the selectivity of adhesion depends on the type of peptide and on the device surface as well as on the shear stress.

Purpose Gene rearrangements involving NTRK1/2/3 can generate fusion oncoproteins containing the kinase domains of TRKA/B/C, respectively. These fusions are rare in non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC), with frequency previously estimated to be <1%. Inhibition of TRK signaling has led to dramatic responses across tumor types with NTRK fusions. Despite the potential benefit of identifying these fusions, the clinicopathologic features of NTRK fusion-positive NSCLCs are not well characterized. Methods We compiled a database of NSCLC cases harboring NTRK fusions. We characterized the clinical, molecular, and histologic features of these cases with central review of histology. Results We identified 11 NSCLC cases harboring NTRK gene fusions verified by next-generation sequencing (NGS) and with available clinical and pathologic data, forming the study cohort. Fusions involved NTRK1 (7 cases) and NTRK3 (4 cases), with 5 and 2 distinct fusion partners, respectively. Cohort patients were 55% male, with a median age at diagnosis of 47.6 years (range 25.3–86.0) and a median pack year history of 0 (range 0–58). 73% of patients had metastatic disease at diagnosis. No concurrent alterations in KRAS, EGFR, ALK, ROS1, or other known oncogenic drivers were identified. Nine cases were adenocarcinoma, including 2 invasive mucinous adenocarcinomas and 1 adenocarcinoma with neuroendocrine features; one was squamous cell carcinoma; and one was neuroendocrine carcinoma. By collating data on 4872 consecutively screened NSCLC cases from unique patients, we estimate a frequency of NTRK fusions in NSCLC of 0.23% (95% CI 0.11–0.40). Conclusion NTRK fusions occur in NSCLCs across genders, ages, smoking histories, and histologies. Given the potent clinical activity of TRK inhibitors, we advocate that all NSCLCs be screened for NTRK fusions using a multiplexed NGS-based fusion assay.

Purpose: The objective was to identify and characterize low molecular weight proteins/peptides in urineandtheirposttranslationalmodifications thatmightbeusedas ascreeningtoolforovariancancer. Experimental Design: Urine samples collected preoperatively from postmenopausal women with ovarian cancer and benign conditions and from nonsurgical controls were analyzed by surface-enhanced laser desorption/ionization mass spectrometry and two-dimensional gel electrophoresis. Selected proteins from mass profiles were purified by chromatography and followed by liquid chromatography-tandem mass spectrometry sequence analysis. Specific antibodies were generated for further characterization, including immunoprecipitation and glycosylation. Quantitative and semiquantitative ELISAs were developed for preliminary validation in patients of 128 ovarian cancer, 52 benign conditions, 44 other cancers, and 188 healthy controls. Results: A protein (m/z f17,400) with higher peak intensities in cancer patients than in benign conditions and controls was identified and subsequently defined as eosinophil-derived neurotoxin (EDN). A glycosylated form of EDN was specifically elevated in ovarian cancer patients. A cluster of COOH-terminal osteopontin was identified from two-dimensional gels of urine from cancer patients. Modified forms EDN and osteopontin fragments were elevated in early-stage ovarian cancers and a combination of both resulted to 93% specificity and 72% sensitivity. Conclusions: Specific elevated posttranslationally modified urinary EDN and osteopontin COOH-terminal fragments in ovarian cancer might lead to potential noninvasive screening tests for early diagnosis. Urine with less complexity than serum and relatively high thermodynamic stability of peptides or metabolites is a promising study medium for discovery of the novel biomarkers which may present in many nonurinary tract neoplastic diseases.

Background: The diagnosis of malignant mesothelioma is frequently difficult, the most common differential diagnosis being reactive pleural conditions and metastatic adenocarcinoma. Soluble mesothelin levels in serum have recently been shown to be highly specific and moderately sensitive for mesothelioma. As most patients with mesothelioma present with exudative effusions of either the pleura or the peritoneum, a study was undertaken to determine if levels of mesothelin were raised in these fluids and if the increased levels could help to distinguish mesothelioma from other causes of exudative effusion. Methods: Pleural fluid was collected from 192 patients who presented to respiratory clinics (52 with malignant mesothelioma, 56 with non-mesotheliomatous malignancies and 84 with effusions of nonneoplastic origin). Peritoneal fluid was collected from 42 patients (7 with mesothelioma, 14 with nonmesotheliomatous malignancies and 21 with benign effusions). Mesothelin levels were determined in effusion and serum samples by ELISA. Results: Significantly higher levels of mesothelin were found in effusions of patients with mesothelioma; with a specificity of 98%, the assay had a sensitivity of 67% comparing patients with mesothelioma and those with effusions of non-neoplastic origin. In 7 out of 10 cases mesothelin levels were raised in the effusion collected 3 weeks to 10 months before the diagnosis of mesothelioma was made; in 4 out of 8 of these, mesothelin levels were increased in the effusion but not in the serum. Conclusions: Measurement of mesothelin concentrations in the pleural and/or peritoneal effusion of patients may aid in the differential diagnosis of mesothelioma in patients presenting with effusions.